ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW
Please do not add any new discussion to this archive page.
All new discussion should go on Talk:Hedgehog.
i see a section in the porcupine family article and here this...
Did you try page inclusion...
...I think, the software will handle this as poor as redirects (?)
Are there special tags like <noinclude>, <includeonly> ... as we know it from MediaWiki?
- xenwolf August 19, 2011, 11:26:56 AM UTC-0700
If you call it "Main Article" it should expand on what is available on the family page.
- genewardsmith August 22, 2011, 12:29:30 PM UTC-0700
Yes Gene, we are talking about Keenan's hypothetical case when someone has created a dedicated page with more content. I will revert all the horrible things I've done here once the demonstration is complete.
- clumma August 22, 2011, 02:52:49 PM UTC-0700
Since we now have 93 "soft redirects", I hope it's OK if I leave one example of an alternative that doesn't fill the wiki with blank clickthrough pages.
- clumma September 19, 2011, 02:55:41 AM UTC-0700
Carl: I think that consistency is more important than doing it any particular way, so if you want to change all the soft redirects to your preferred way of doing it, I won't do anything to interfere. Just make sure you're doing it to improve the wiki and not to prove a point.
- keenanpepper September 19, 2011, 11:06:15 AM UTC-0700
There is an important problem with the wikispaces redirects, that I forgot to mention: they are red!
wikispaces closes, https://en.xen.wiki/images/3/3c/Wikispaces-redirects-are-red.png
...and therefore undistinguishable from links to non-existing pages.
- xenwolf September 19, 2011, 12:20:57 PM UTC-0700
Xenwolf, there is a workaround for the link color bug. I just went to http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/page/edit/generator and created a page there. The page should never be seen because whenever you go to "generator" it redirects to "Generators", but it makes links to "generator" the color of links to existing articles.
- keenanpepper September 19, 2011, 02:42:43 PM UTC-0700
Not so bad, but too tricky I think. Next problem: Backlinks are not redirected.
Wikispaces is a lousy wiki implementation.
Was a wiki migration ever been discussed?
- xenwolf September 19, 2011, 11:39:10 PM UTC-0700
You won't interfere if I manually go through and fix the 93 crap pages you unilaterally restructured the wiki with? Gee, thanks! Too kind.
- clumma September 20, 2011, 10:08:02 PM UTC-0700
1. Why in the world would I make changes for you if I don't agree with them? I think the soft redirect pages are the best possible workaround for the crappy redirect implementation.
2. If you actually looked at the pages you'd see that I didn't create all of them. I didn't even create the first ones, so it's hard to see what you mean by "unilaterally".
- keenanpepper September 20, 2011, 10:25:46 PM UTC-0700
I know you didn't create all of them. You announced the policy unilaterally on the tuning list, and created them at a high rate while discussion there was ongoing. In light of this, I interpreted your remarks above as patronizing - why would I be here if I didn't care about the wiki?
I must say I don't understand your idea. You are not addressing any need, but are preemptively supposing such a need will arise, and then claiming that this preemption should be done consistently at all costs, despite that nothing else on the wiki - including things of actual importance like definitions, directory pages, etc - is remotely consistent.
- clumma September 22, 2011, 09:59:59 AM UTC-0700
Okay, I don't really disagree with any of that (except I never said "at all costs", because that's stupid).
So... what are you going to do about it?
- keenanpepper September 22, 2011, 11:46:44 AM UTC-0700
Very little. My schedule is unsettled lately. Hopefully it'll normalize in a few months.
- clumma September 22, 2011, 05:48:09 PM UTC-0700
Quite right, I will delete this page. I made it when experimenting with page inclusion.
My experiments showed the inclusion system is as poor as the redirects. :( And there are no special tags like you mention.
- clumma August 19, 2011, 08:41:22 PM UTC-0700
I removed the extra heading and included it into the page Porcupine family with a backling there (in the heading "Hedgehog").
There are two problems, I adressed on the tuning list http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/tuning/message/101363
- xenwolf August 22, 2011, 12:08:39 AM UTC-0700
Now I think, that the "wikiest way" was to add a short statement (hard-coded) to the overview page and not to include the detail page.
(of course with links in both directions)
- xenwolf August 22, 2011, 12:34:53 AM UTC-0700
I see you got around the toc and heading font problems by leaving the heading on the family page and removing it from the included detail page. That seems to work.
But if I understand your latest "wikiest way" proposal, it is the same as what I had
- clumma August 22, 2011, 02:09:27 AM UTC-0700
Nearly the same. There should be a statement that makes more sense to the containing article than see somewhere.
- xenwolf August 22, 2011, 02:51:26 AM UTC-0700
Howabout "Main article:"?
- clumma August 22, 2011, 11:48:08 AM UTC-0700